>> I did find something which might be the real problem. Within
>> delete_output_reload there are two calls to count_occurrences. The
>> second one will be called with parameters
>
>...
>
>> Due to this difference, no occurence is found. So the second
>> operand=20 of the (plus:DI ...) is not
Erwin Unruh wrote:
> Sorry, I mislead you. Somehow I did confuse (mem/c:DI (reg:SI 2 2) [0 S8
> A8])
> with (reg:DI 2). Register 2 is used correctly.
> I do not think any reload is inherited in this case.
Ah, right. That did confuse me ;-)
> I did find something which might be the real problem.
>From: Ulrich Weigand
>
>Erwin Unruh wrote:
>
>> I have a problem with delete_output_reload. It sometimes deletes
>> instructions which are needed. Here an analysis of a recent
>case (In a
>> private version of the S390 port). The original S390 shows
>almost the
>> same reloads, but chooses d
Erwin Unruh wrote:
> I have a problem with delete_output_reload. It sometimes deletes
> instructions
> which are needed. Here an analysis of a recent case (In a private
> version of
> the S390 port). The original S390 shows almost the same reloads, but
> chooses
> different registers.
What GCC ve
